by eric356 109 Replies latest watchtower bible
While you are at it BXJW, why not check out and answer what TD offered as proof ?
I notice ,like most apologists, you just ignore the awkward proof that goes against your contentions, and continue to spout the same nonsense, that is not debate, address the proofs that have been offered to you, or get off your high horse.
I got a chuckle or two from reading this thread, but going back to the original post and quote from the WT...
"Today, there is a rising tide of atheistic and evolutionist propaganda dependent on flawed and baseless reasoning. We should not let this flood of faulty thinking confuse or intimidate us."
Technically speaking, you could claim the statement to be true...to a point. First of all, there is a rising tide of atheistic and evolutionist information...that is based on observation and fact. That's the fact that is shuffled out of the picture completely.
The WTS doesn't want the reader to contemplate the facts. The want to accentuate the negative...which is that with the rising tide of evidences and theories comes a rising tide of propaganda from dubious sources that is flawed. If one were to hold the WTS to task for this statement, they could find some evidence to substantiate their claim. The journalistic issue here is that they're not being totally honest or forthcoming. By wording their article as they did, they know that they're preaching to their own choir, thus influencing them to come to the conclusion the WTS wants (much like FOX news...but I digress)
By making such a blanket statement, all the rank and file dubs nod their heads and go, "yup, yup...evolution is false, just like we've always known". It's a black and white world, dubland is. The WTS warns them to not let a flood of faulty thinking confuse or intimidate them, which is good advice in and of itself. The problem is that it only applies to outside sources...never to thinking or reasoning from the WTS itself.
To JWs, reading a WT is the same as doing real research, so they read this shit and close the door on any question about the validity...or at least the possibility...of evolution.
TD gave you proof even after you moved the goalpost. Why dont you address it?
Believingxjw do you believe in a global flood?
I ask because if you do then speciation had to have happen. Noah could not have fit all species of animals alive today in the ark.
I consider snakes and lizards as totally different types of animals (species, kind or whatever word you want to use), but I am not sure how you will interpret "kind" in the bible. But there is alot of evidence for the evolution of lizards into snakes. Take a look at the video below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vgPujX2RYw
here is some info on a skink with tiny (seemingly useless) legs, http://www.arkive.org/kasners-dwarf-burrowing-skink/scelotes-kasneri/
That said we can all have our own opinion on these things. I personally cannot justify with any evidence that evolution just stops changing an animal at some point. I see animals like the mud skipper and you have a fish living on land. I look at Skinks and I see a lizard with useless tiny legs that then moves about like a snake. I see the Hoatzin bird that in its youth has front claws that is uses to climb (later looses when it gains wings, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKwwdcfc4Ck). My point is that seemingly identifiable traits that we could use to group creatures like fish = living in water, is not a given. There is some fluidity to all the animals forms/traits we see today. I then go and look at the fact that alot of species just died out. In fact they estimate that 99% of species that every lived are extinct. Why would a God create thousands of species to eventually go extinct?
You can't prove it?
Hybrid and polyploid speciation have been observed in plants. This can occur over a single generation, and create a new species which is not cross-fertile with the ancestor.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2442920/?tool=pmcentrez
That's the National Institutes of Health, by the way. Not some atheist blog.
BTS
heheh I bet someone sent the GB a copy of The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins, with the section that decimates the Creation book to smithereens appropriately highlighted.
I have both the hardbound book and the audio version of The God Delusion, and I have to say that listening to Dawkins slay the creationist bullshit in that book makes me laugh every time.
One of the most popular landscape plants in the American Southwest is such a hybrid.
E. grusonii
Genetically, it's a barrel cactus, but it is reproductively isolated from the parent genus because hybridization resulted in an ovary that is incompatible with pollen from the parents.
Self-perpetuating hybrid = New species
Thanks TD! Now I can revisit the question!
You can't prove it?
You want the truth? You can't handle the truth! It's too spikey and prickly for you!
BTS
That's the National Institutes of Health, by the way. Not some atheist blog
hehe, that was BEFORE it posted something pro-evolution!
Down with the evil pro-evolution atheist blog!
What a silly pointless thread.
The "reasoning" appears to be something like this:
1) I refuse to believe in evolution
2) Therefore, you can't prove to met that evolution to be true
3) Since you can't prove it to me, it must as a result be false
Mind boggling.
And people like that vote, drive cars, have children....yikes!
